I'm curious: are repubs dumb enough to think Iran would roll over and do whatever the West wants?

Always the spoiler and fuckup, this is a president and a goofy administration with absolutely no clue as to what they're doing.

Here are the 2012 Swift banking sanctions, pushed by the republicans and resisted by Oblahblah, that finally caused some effect on the Iranian economy. In essence, the republicans brought Iran to the table and Obama blew it for America and the world. What a disaster this president is:

Obama administration takes back seat on Iran sanctions

Congress and Europe have been much more aggressive in punishing Iran for its alleged nuclear weapons program.

February 17, 2012|By Paul Richter, Los Angeles Times

Top administration officials late last year were strongly resistant when Congress slapped Iran's central bank with harsh sanctions. The European Union then went further, however, imposing an embargo to halt purchases of Iranian oil by European nations over the ensuing five months.

This month, Congress began crafting legislation that would essentially cut Iran out of the global clearinghouse for international financial transactions known as SWIFT, or the Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication. The far-reaching step could inflict severe damage to Iran's economy by restricting the ability of banks and other institutions to move funds in or out of the country.

On Friday, SWIFT announced that it was "ready to implement sanctions against Iranian financial institutions" in response to new regulations the EU is set to enact.

Mark Dubowitz, an energy expert who has been advising Congress on sanctions, said the Obama administration has tried to add sanctions "in a measured way to assure international support and to avoid anything that would spook oil and financial markets."

But as concern over Iran's nuclear progress has intensified, members of Congress, with support from the French and British governments, "have really taken the lead in being aggressive," said Dubowitz, who is executive director of a pro-sanctions group called Foundation for Defense of Democracies.

The latest sanctions clearly are having an effect. In recent weeks, the value of the Iranian currency has plummeted and prices for food and other consumer goods have soared, causing hardship for ordinary Iranians and putting political pressure on the regime.

A major crisis with Iran carries political risks for the White House. A war or other disruptive event that causes a sharp rise in oil prices could endanger the United States' fragile economic recovery and probably President Obama's chances for reelection.

As a result, the White House has had to scramble to keep up with the pace set by Congress and the Europeans. While critics have long accused Obama of "leading from behind" by empowering other countries to carry out America's bidding on world crises, the administration is now trying to avoid the appearance of "following from behind.
"

Administration officials insist they have been aggressive on Iran. They point to their latest action, an announcement Thursday that the U.S. will blacklist Iran's Ministry of Intelligence and Security for its support of Syrian President Bashar Assad's brutal repression of opposition protests, as well as for its backing of militant groups Hamas and Hezbollah.
 
Always the spoiler and fuckup, this is a president and a goofy administration with absolutely no clue as to what they're doing.

Here are the 2012 Swift banking sanctions, pushed by the republicans and resisted by Oblahblah, that finally caused some effect on the Iranian economy. In essence, the republicans brought Iran to the table and Obama blew it for America and the world. What a disaster this president is:

Obama administration takes back seat on Iran sanctions

Congress and Europe have been much more aggressive in punishing Iran for its alleged nuclear weapons program.

February 17, 2012|By Paul Richter, Los Angeles Times

Top administration officials late last year were strongly resistant when Congress slapped Iran's central bank with harsh sanctions. The European Union then went further, however, imposing an embargo to halt purchases of Iranian oil by European nations over the ensuing five months.

This month, Congress began crafting legislation that would essentially cut Iran out of the global clearinghouse for international financial transactions known as SWIFT, or the Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication. The far-reaching step could inflict severe damage to Iran's economy by restricting the ability of banks and other institutions to move funds in or out of the country.

On Friday, SWIFT announced that it was "ready to implement sanctions against Iranian financial institutions" in response to new regulations the EU is set to enact.

Mark Dubowitz, an energy expert who has been advising Congress on sanctions, said the Obama administration has tried to add sanctions "in a measured way to assure international support and to avoid anything that would spook oil and financial markets."

But as concern over Iran's nuclear progress has intensified, members of Congress, with support from the French and British governments, "have really taken the lead in being aggressive," said Dubowitz, who is executive director of a pro-sanctions group called Foundation for Defense of Democracies.

The latest sanctions clearly are having an effect. In recent weeks, the value of the Iranian currency has plummeted and prices for food and other consumer goods have soared, causing hardship for ordinary Iranians and putting political pressure on the regime.

A major crisis with Iran carries political risks for the White House. A war or other disruptive event that causes a sharp rise in oil prices could endanger the United States' fragile economic recovery and probably President Obama's chances for reelection.

As a result, the White House has had to scramble to keep up with the pace set by Congress and the Europeans. While critics have long accused Obama of "leading from behind" by empowering other countries to carry out America's bidding on world crises, the administration is now trying to avoid the appearance of "following from behind.
"

Administration officials insist they have been aggressive on Iran. They point to their latest action, an announcement Thursday that the U.S. will blacklist Iran's Ministry of Intelligence and Security for its support of Syrian President Bashar Assad's brutal repression of opposition protests, as well as for its backing of militant groups Hamas and Hezbollah.
Don't you possess the ability to think critically or does your partisan nature just get in the way? How is it possible for republican lawmakers in the US to legislate a Belgium consortium subject to the laws of the European Union?
 
For the record, if the nuclear powers will not implement Article VI of the NPT and work towards disarmament it is only logical for any nation that feels threatened by its neighbours' nuclear weapons to nuke up.

Iran has not started the nuclear race in the ME.
 
If someone else were in charge of the deal? You know the one sponsored by 7 countries? They like to think Obama is weak which is why concessions were made, but it's completely stupid to think Iran, under any circumstance, would do whatever the fuck repubs want. It's so nauseatingly ignorant.

Enough with the whole "well if St. Reagan was in charge of that deal derp, derp, derp!"

This deal is better than no deal. Get over it.

Deal??? This was a concession and appeasement. There was no deal. Get over yourself.
 
Always the spoiler and fuckup, this is a president and a goofy administration with absolutely no clue as to what they're doing.

Here are the 2012 Swift banking sanctions, pushed by the republicans and resisted by Oblahblah, that finally caused some effect on the Iranian economy. In essence, the republicans brought Iran to the table and Obama blew it for America and the world. What a disaster this president is:

Obama administration takes back seat on Iran sanctions

Congress and Europe have been much more aggressive in punishing Iran for its alleged nuclear weapons program.

February 17, 2012|By Paul Richter, Los Angeles Times

Top administration officials late last year were strongly resistant when Congress slapped Iran's central bank with harsh sanctions. The European Union then went further, however, imposing an embargo to halt purchases of Iranian oil by European nations over the ensuing five months.

This month, Congress began crafting legislation that would essentially cut Iran out of the global clearinghouse for international financial transactions known as SWIFT, or the Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication. The far-reaching step could inflict severe damage to Iran's economy by restricting the ability of banks and other institutions to move funds in or out of the country.

On Friday, SWIFT announced that it was "ready to implement sanctions against Iranian financial institutions" in response to new regulations the EU is set to enact.

Mark Dubowitz, an energy expert who has been advising Congress on sanctions, said the Obama administration has tried to add sanctions "in a measured way to assure international support and to avoid anything that would spook oil and financial markets."

But as concern over Iran's nuclear progress has intensified, members of Congress, with support from the French and British governments, "have really taken the lead in being aggressive," said Dubowitz, who is executive director of a pro-sanctions group called Foundation for Defense of Democracies.

The latest sanctions clearly are having an effect. In recent weeks, the value of the Iranian currency has plummeted and prices for food and other consumer goods have soared, causing hardship for ordinary Iranians and putting political pressure on the regime.

A major crisis with Iran carries political risks for the White House. A war or other disruptive event that causes a sharp rise in oil prices could endanger the United States' fragile economic recovery and probably President Obama's chances for reelection.

As a result, the White House has had to scramble to keep up with the pace set by Congress and the Europeans. While critics have long accused Obama of "leading from behind" by empowering other countries to carry out America's bidding on world crises, the administration is now trying to avoid the appearance of "following from behind.
"

Administration officials insist they have been aggressive on Iran. They point to their latest action, an announcement Thursday that the U.S. will blacklist Iran's Ministry of Intelligence and Security for its support of Syrian President Bashar Assad's brutal repression of opposition protests, as well as for its backing of militant groups Hamas and Hezbollah.
Don't you possess the ability to think critically or does your partisan nature just get in the way? How is it possible for republican lawmakers in the US to legislate a Belgium consortium subject to the laws of the European Union?

So even when presented with the truth from a highly leftist / liberal newspaper that the Obama administration was out to give Iran a break in 2012, while the repubs pushed for and managed to get the tougher bank swift sanctions which caused the Iranian economy to collapse, you mumble a totally irrelevant whiney partisan response.
 
For the record, if the nuclear powers will not implement Article VI of the NPT and work towards disarmament it is only logical for any nation that feels threatened by its neighbours' nuclear weapons to nuke up.

Iran has not started the nuclear race in the ME.
Yeah? Maybe you should ask the Arab Sunnis about that.
 
His agenda will not allow of reality.
As opposed to your delusional agenda which has been proven an epic fail, and will keep the Sunnis and Shiites slaughtering each other by the millions over the next 30 years.

But hey...as long as they're busy killing each other and not us infidels. :clap2:
 
You almost gotta laugh at how ignorant the useful idiots on the left can be. Did American lives matter when Wilson sent the Doughboys to save France from the Hun at the cost of about 60,000 Americans lost in a couple of years?. We did it again about 25 years later at the cost of 200,000 American lives in a democrat administration in WW2. Harry Truman sent Troops to Korea on an executive order so Korea was a democrat party operation. It was bungled so badly that we lost anywhere from 38,000 to 50,000 Troops in a three year quagmire and ended up where we started. Here we are a half a century later and Truman's mistakes are still evident. LBJ thought that the democrat party idea of warfare would trump reality and we won every battle in Vietnam and still lost the war. Bush did the right thing in Iraq but the freaking traitors in the democrat party couldn't deal with a ground war victory during a republican administration so they insulted the Troops and handed Iraq back to their political allies.
 
Bush did the right thing in Iraq
A crime against peace by initiating aggressive war and committing war crimes by the use of torture and breaching the Geneva Conventions is only the right thing to exceptional thinkers.
 
As opposed to your delusional agenda which has been proven an epic fail, and will keep the Sunnis and Shiites slaughtering each other by the millions over the next 30 years.

But hey...as long as they're busy killing each other and not us infidels. :clap2:
My agenda is to have the US stop committing clusterfucks in the ME, as when they supported war between Sunni and Shia in the Iraq / Iran war.

I guess that was when you considered US policy a success as they were killing each other and not you.

edit...On consideration I think I'd have to agree that's a delusional agenda. I mean, having the US stop committing clusterfucks in the ME!

It is to laugh.
 
Last edited:
As opposed to your delusional agenda which has been proven an epic fail, and will keep the Sunnis and Shiites slaughtering each other by the millions over the next 30 years.

But hey...as long as they're busy killing each other and not us infidels. :clap2:
My agenda is to have the US stop committing clusterfucks in the ME, as when they supported war between Sunni and Shia in the Iraq / Iran war.

I guess that was when you considered US policy a success as they were killing each other and not you.

edit...On consideration I think I'd have to agree that's a delusional agenda. I mean, having the US stop committing clusterfucks in the ME!

It is to laugh.

Obama was handed a fairly stable ME in Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Libya, Egypt etc. it didn't take long before his premature pullout from Iraq, his much advertised "Arab Spring" (which was going to bring Arab secular democracies in the ME), the bombing of Libya, and his fake red lines in Syria have brought total mayhem and mass genocide throughout the region along with the rise of barbaric groups like ISIS.

Remember his bullshit tag line from the 2012 elections "Al Queda is on the run blah blah blah..." Shortly thereafter it was the same Al Queda that slaughtered a U.S. ambassador in Ben Ghazi, and the criminal we have for president got in front of the cameras and totally lied and defrauded the American public, making it look like it was because of a "film".

Yup the guy is a total foreign policy genius! Exactly the guy we want negotiating one of the most important matters such as the Iran nuclear deal, right? But fear not, we have his Secretary of State, another professional liar, running for president.
 
Always the spoiler and fuckup, this is a president and a goofy administration with absolutely no clue as to what they're doing.

Here are the 2012 Swift banking sanctions, pushed by the republicans and resisted by Oblahblah, that finally caused some effect on the Iranian economy. In essence, the republicans brought Iran to the table and Obama blew it for America and the world. What a disaster this president is:

Obama administration takes back seat on Iran sanctions

Congress and Europe have been much more aggressive in punishing Iran for its alleged nuclear weapons program.

February 17, 2012|By Paul Richter, Los Angeles Times

Top administration officials late last year were strongly resistant when Congress slapped Iran's central bank with harsh sanctions. The European Union then went further, however, imposing an embargo to halt purchases of Iranian oil by European nations over the ensuing five months.

This month, Congress began crafting legislation that would essentially cut Iran out of the global clearinghouse for international financial transactions known as SWIFT, or the Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication. The far-reaching step could inflict severe damage to Iran's economy by restricting the ability of banks and other institutions to move funds in or out of the country.

On Friday, SWIFT announced that it was "ready to implement sanctions against Iranian financial institutions" in response to new regulations the EU is set to enact.

Mark Dubowitz, an energy expert who has been advising Congress on sanctions, said the Obama administration has tried to add sanctions "in a measured way to assure international support and to avoid anything that would spook oil and financial markets."

But as concern over Iran's nuclear progress has intensified, members of Congress, with support from the French and British governments, "have really taken the lead in being aggressive," said Dubowitz, who is executive director of a pro-sanctions group called Foundation for Defense of Democracies.

The latest sanctions clearly are having an effect. In recent weeks, the value of the Iranian currency has plummeted and prices for food and other consumer goods have soared, causing hardship for ordinary Iranians and putting political pressure on the regime.

A major crisis with Iran carries political risks for the White House. A war or other disruptive event that causes a sharp rise in oil prices could endanger the United States' fragile economic recovery and probably President Obama's chances for reelection.

As a result, the White House has had to scramble to keep up with the pace set by Congress and the Europeans. While critics have long accused Obama of "leading from behind" by empowering other countries to carry out America's bidding on world crises, the administration is now trying to avoid the appearance of "following from behind.
"

Administration officials insist they have been aggressive on Iran. They point to their latest action, an announcement Thursday that the U.S. will blacklist Iran's Ministry of Intelligence and Security for its support of Syrian President Bashar Assad's brutal repression of opposition protests, as well as for its backing of militant groups Hamas and Hezbollah.
Don't you possess the ability to think critically or does your partisan nature just get in the way? How is it possible for republican lawmakers in the US to legislate a Belgium consortium subject to the laws of the European Union?

So even when presented with the truth from a highly leftist / liberal newspaper that the Obama administration was out to give Iran a break in 2012, while the repubs pushed for and managed to get the tougher bank swift sanctions which caused the Iranian economy to collapse, you mumble a totally irrelevant whiney partisan response.
Truth in the article? The truth was that SWIFT cut off Iran from their system pursuant to the laws of the EU and that was a successful technique in hampering Iran's ability to conduct it's business. The rest of the article reads like an opinion piece, it's partisan tripe.
My response wasn't partisan in any way. It was just a question, which you failed to answer.
 
I just cannot believe what losers every last fucking liberal is. Dear God I fucking hate them.
 
I just cannot believe what losers every last fucking liberal is. Dear God I fucking hate them.

Indeed, those fucking pussies cry every time when some peace & democracy bombing is clearly needed

What's the use of a 1 $trillion war budget if you can't even play with it

I still hate McInsane for putting that illegal, kenyan, commie, muslim without a birth certificate into the oval office

:alcoholic:

d4371807644bfc15df9e58b7184c698489c036781498fc9fd2fe5f5c181bb93d.jpg
 
If someone else were in charge of the deal? You know the one sponsored by 7 countries? They like to think Obama is weak which is why concessions were made, but it's completely stupid to think Iran, under any circumstance, would do whatever the fuck repubs want. It's so nauseatingly ignorant.

Enough with the whole "well if St. Reagan was in charge of that deal derp, derp, derp!"

This deal is better than no deal. Get over it.


I'm curious...

Are people like you dumb enough to believe that Iran will adhere to the agreement? Are they dumb enough to believe that Iran will stop being a leading sponsor of terrorism? That they will cease and desist completely their nuclear ambitions? Are they too dumb to see that, not only will Iran not stop their work in the nuclear field, they will now have at their disposal billions of dollars to fund terrorism? This deal is good for Iran.

And while we're on the subject, why a "deal," an "agreement?" Why not a treaty? You know why right? Or are folks like you too dumb to understand?


It's so nauseatingly ignorant...
 
I can't understand this Iran fear. A third world country half a world away from the US has US citizens pissing their pants with anxiety.
 

Forum List

Back
Top